Prove the alternating sum of a decreasing sequence converging to 0 is Cauchy. Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraSuppose for all positive integers $n$, $|x_n-y_n|< frac1n$ Prove that $(x_n)$ is also Cauchy.Proof check for completenessProve that $d_n$ is a Cauchy sequence in $mathbbR$Prove $aX_n +bY_n$ is a Cauchy Sequence.Prove a sequence is a Cauchy and thus convergentIf $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are Cauchy sequences, then give a direct argument that $ (x_n + y_n)$ is a Cauchy sequenceIf $x_n$ and $y_n$ are Cauchy then $leftfrac2x_ny_nright$ is CauchyLet $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers. Define a new sequence $y_n$ by $y_n = (x_n)(x_n+1)$. Show that $y_n$ is a CS.Let $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of real numbers, prove that a new sequence $y_n$, with $y_n$=$x_n^frac13$, is also a Cauchy sequence.$x_n rightarrow x$ iff the modified sequence is Cauchy

What was Apollo 13's "Little Jolt" after MECO?

Why did C use the -> operator instead of reusing the . operator?

Holes in ElementMesh with ToElementMesh of ImplicitRegion

What is the best way to deal with NPC-NPC combat?

Is Diceware more secure than a long passphrase?

Rolling Stones Sway guitar solo chord function

Is it acceptable to use working hours to read general interest books?

A Dictionary or Encyclopedia of Fantasy or Fairy Tales from the 1960s

How would this chord from "Rocket Man" be analyzed?

std::is_constructible on incomplete types

How to not starve gigantic beasts

How to open locks without disable device?

Passing args from the bash script to the function in the script

Has a Nobel Peace laureate ever been accused of war crimes?

Does Feeblemind produce an ongoing magical effect that can be dispelled?

Map material from china not allowed to leave the country

My admission is revoked after accepting the admission offer

A strange hotel

c++ diamond problem - How to call base method only once

How to use @AuraEnabled base class method in Lightning Component?

Does Mathematica have an implementation of the Poisson binomial distribution?

Will I lose my paid in full property

Raising a bilingual kid. When should we introduce the majority language?

Married in secret, can marital status in passport be changed at a later date?



Prove the alternating sum of a decreasing sequence converging to 0 is Cauchy.



Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraSuppose for all positive integers $n$, $|x_n-y_n|< frac1n$ Prove that $(x_n)$ is also Cauchy.Proof check for completenessProve that $d_n$ is a Cauchy sequence in $mathbbR$Prove $aX_n +bY_n$ is a Cauchy Sequence.Prove a sequence is a Cauchy and thus convergentIf $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are Cauchy sequences, then give a direct argument that $ (x_n + y_n)$ is a Cauchy sequenceIf $x_n$ and $y_n$ are Cauchy then $leftfrac2x_ny_nright$ is CauchyLet $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers. Define a new sequence $y_n$ by $y_n = (x_n)(x_n+1)$. Show that $y_n$ is a CS.Let $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of real numbers, prove that a new sequence $y_n$, with $y_n$=$x_n^frac13$, is also a Cauchy sequence.$x_n rightarrow x$ iff the modified sequence is Cauchy










3












$begingroup$


Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$



I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.



I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.



I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*



I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore is my answer okay?
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    2 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    11 mins ago
















3












$begingroup$


Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$



I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.



I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.



I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*



I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore is my answer okay?
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    2 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    11 mins ago














3












3








3


1



$begingroup$


Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$



I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.



I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.



I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*



I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$



I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.



I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.



I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*



I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.







real-analysis cauchy-sequences






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 5 hours ago









oranjioranji

666




666







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore is my answer okay?
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    2 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    11 mins ago













  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore is my answer okay?
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    2 hours ago











  • $begingroup$
    I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    11 mins ago








1




1




$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
4 hours ago












$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
4 hours ago












$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
2 hours ago





$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
2 hours ago













$begingroup$
I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
11 mins ago





$begingroup$
I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
11 mins ago











2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    1 hour ago


















4












$begingroup$

This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    2 hours ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3201256%2fprove-the-alternating-sum-of-a-decreasing-sequence-converging-to-0-is-cauchy%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3












$begingroup$

To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    1 hour ago















3












$begingroup$

To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    1 hour ago













3












3








3





$begingroup$

To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 1 hour ago

























answered 2 hours ago









trancelocationtrancelocation

14.6k1929




14.6k1929











  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    1 hour ago
















  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    1 hour ago















$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
1 hour ago




1




1




$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
1 hour ago











4












$begingroup$

This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    2 hours ago















4












$begingroup$

This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    2 hours ago













4












4








4





$begingroup$

This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 4 hours ago









Subhasis BiswasSubhasis Biswas

628512




628512











  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    2 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    2 hours ago















$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
2 hours ago












$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
2 hours ago

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3201256%2fprove-the-alternating-sum-of-a-decreasing-sequence-converging-to-0-is-cauchy%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Nidaros erkebispedøme

Birsay

Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...